Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 159 (GAU)

Ghokuto Sema v. State Of Nagaland

2020-02-07

NELSON SAILO

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. P. Pius Lotha, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. A. Ayemi, learned State counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 as well as Mr. N. Mozhui, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3. None appears for the private respondents despite notice. 2. The petitioners were initially 18 in numbers but now there are only 16 petitioners after 2 of them have withdrawn from the writ petition. Mr.Pius Lotha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners were appointed as Teachers in Government High School some time in the year 1987 to 2013 in various High School within the State of Nagaland. After serving for a number of years in their respective post, the petitioners were deployed with the erstwhile SSA and RMSA from the School Education Department. After the merging of SSA and RMSA into Samagra Shiksha, the petitioners continued to be deployed under the said scheme and they have been performing their duties and functions such as collecting data and also looking into the finance as Accountants or Assistant Accountants etc under the said scheme. 3. The State respondents in the Department of School Education through the Principal Secretary to the Government of Nagaland issued a Notification dated 19/2/2019 (Annexure-C) for repatriation of the employees under the Samagra Shiksha w.e.f 31/3/2019. Thereafter vide Notification dated 8/4/2019 (Annexure- D), the said authority notified the extension of the repatriation till 30/6/2019. The last date of repatriation was again deferred till 31/3/2020 vide Notification dated 9/7/2019 (Annexure-E) by the same authority. Vide Notification dated 26/7/2019 (Annexure-F), the Principal Secretary, Government of Nagaland, School Education Department in continuation of the earlier Notification dated 9/7/2019 notified that the structural changes and manpower engagement under Samagra Shiksha will be effected through open advertisement and conduct of examination/interview after the expiry of the last extension order dated 31/3/2020. However, to the surprise of the petitioners, the Chief Secretary and the Chairman Nagaland Education Mission Society vide the impugned order dated 20/8/2019 relieved all the deployed officers/officials from the Directorate of School Education/other Departments from Samagra Shiksha with immediate effect and directed the relieved officials to report to the parent Department/cadre. The officials relieved are mentioned in the enclosed Annexure to the said order wherein the names of the petitioners also find place. The total number of officials relieved are 198 in all. 4. The officials relieved are mentioned in the enclosed Annexure to the said order wherein the names of the petitioners also find place. The total number of officials relieved are 198 in all. 4. The respondent No.1 vide an order of the same date i.e.20/8/2019 (Annexure-H) re-deployed on attachment basis as many as 133 officers/teachers/HM/Vice Principals under the Directorate of School Education to Samagra Sikhsha in the given terms and conditions mentioned in the order. The names of the employees were given in the enclosed Annexure to the order. The individual employees who were deployed under Samgra Shiksha was again modified/notified by the Mission Director vide his letter No.NLD/SS/ESTT/DEPLOY/2019-20 dated 3/9/2019 (Annexure-I). The petitioners contend that their names did not figure in the first list or in the revised list where the employees/officers concerned have been re-deployed under the Samagra Shiksha. 5. Mr. Pius Lotha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the employees were unilaterally and arbitrarily chosen by the respondent authorities concerned without any selection and without considering the case of the petitioners. Further, it was only in contravention of the Notification dated 26/7/2019 which was issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, School Education Department (the competent authority) where advertisement and conduct of examination/interview for the deployment under Samagra Shiksha Nagaland was contemplated. Being highly aggrieved, the petitioners are therefore before this Court. The learned counsel submits that this Court vide order dated 21/10/2019 while issuing notice to the respondents passed an interim order directing the respondents that the petitioners should not be released from their respective engagement under the scheme until the next returnable date. He submits that the said interim order subsist till date but the respondent authorities have not allotted the petitioners any work. 6. Referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 on 18/11/2019, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the requisition of service of officers/teachers/vice principals/HM for deployment under Samagra Shiksha vide communication dated 6/7/2019 said to be issued by the State Mission Director and the NOC for deployment of 133 officers and teachers working under the Directorate of School Education as given by the Principal Director, Directorate of School Education vide communication dated 26/7/2019, is only an after thought. He submits that according to the petitioners, no such requisition or NOC was ever sought for as contended by the respondents and therefore, the impugned deployment orders dated 20/8/2019 and also the impugned order relieving all the engaged employees under Samagra Shiksha through an order of the same date i.e.20/8/2019 cannot be sustained and liable to be set aside. 7. The matter was heard at length on 29-01-2020 and this Court wanted the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 to produce the relevant records i.e. File No. NLD/SS/A- 6/2018 and File No. ED/EST/1/NOC/SS/2019 which are the files of Nagaland Education Mission Society, Samagra Shiksha, Kohima and the Directorate of School Education, Government of Nagaland. Mr. N. Mozhui, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1and 3 thereafter on 03-02-2020, produced the relevant files and the same was perused by this Court. However, this Court again wanted the learned counsel, Mr. N. Mozhui to obtain instructions with regard to the basis on how the screening was done before issuance of the NOC vide the communication dated 26-07-2019 (Annexure-2) of the affidavit- in-opposition of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and directed the matter to be listed again today i.e. 05-02- 2020. 8. Today, Mr. N. Mozhui, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 submits that there was no separate screening as such conducted by the Samagra Shiksha but the same was done basing on the performance of the employee concerned as per the requisition. Learned counsel further submits that the Notification dated 26-07-2019 (Annexure-F) of the writ petition notifying that the structural changes and manpower engagement under Samagra Shiksha, Nagaland will be effected through open advertisement and conduct of examination/interview after the expiry of the last extension order pertains to technical posts which was infact manned by contract employees. In this connection, the learned counsel referring to the Notification dated 20-06-2019, which is annexed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3, learned counsel submits that assessment/screening test was to be conducted on 29-06-2019 for interested and eligible existing contract employees under etstwhile SSA and RMSA for engagement on contract basis in Samagra Shiksha, Nagaland for the period 2019-2020 for different categories of posts as provided in the said notification. 1 and 3, learned counsel submits that assessment/screening test was to be conducted on 29-06-2019 for interested and eligible existing contract employees under etstwhile SSA and RMSA for engagement on contract basis in Samagra Shiksha, Nagaland for the period 2019-2020 for different categories of posts as provided in the said notification. Aggrieved with the same, persons who aspired to be appointed through open competition approached this Court by filing W.P. (C) 83 of 2019. During the pendency of the writ petition, the Principal Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, School Education Department had issued the aforesaid Notification dated 26-07-2019, notifying that the engagement of man power under Samagra Shiksha will be effected through open advertisement. The same authority by way of Notification dated 28-06-2019 also cancelled the assessment/screening test which was to be conducted on 29-06-2019 as indicated in the Notification dated 20-06-2019. Therefore, the writ petition was rendered infractuous and the same was disposed of vide order dated 31-07-2019. 9. Learned counsel further submits that it is therefore, clear that the conduct of examination and interview through open advertisement is in respect of the technical posts such as, Accountant, Auditor, Assistant Auditor, Account Assistant and Programner etc. and not for deployment of regular teachers against such post. The petitioner in fact are Government High School Teachers who have only been deployed under Samagra Shiksha to perform works other than those meant for the technical posts as mentioned earlier. He, therefore, submits that the petitioners cannot have any legitimate right to continue under the Samagra Shiksha. The requirement of Samagra Shiksha in terms of requisition made on 06-07-2019, was on the basis of the performance of respective individuals and since the petitioner have not been included in the said list, they cannot claim to remain under Samagra Shiksha. 10. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioners although directed to report back to the parent department/cadre vide order dated 20-08-2019 with immediate effect failed to do so and for which, the order dated 31-10-2019, directing the official/officers mentioned in the included list to immediately report back to their respective place of posting. The order was issued by the Principal Director, Directorate of School Education, Government of Nagaland. The order was issued by the Principal Director, Directorate of School Education, Government of Nagaland. Though the names of the petitioners are included in the said list, they failed to join back to their respective place of posting and the petitioners instead approached this Court through this writ petition. He also submits that the petitioners have failed to challenge the requisition letter dated 06-07-2019 and NOC dated 26-07-2019 (Annexures 1 and 2 to the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3) and therefore, even for this reason, the writ petition should be dismissed. 11. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the rival parties and I have also perused the materials available on records. 12. As may be noticed, the petitioners were appointed as Government High School Teachers between the years 1987 to 2013 in various high schools within the State. After serving for a number of years as high school teachers, their services were utilized under the erstwhile SSA and RMSA. Thereafter, the 2 (two) schemes merged into Samagra Shiksha and they continued to be deployed under the said scheme till the impugned order dated 20-08-2019 came to be issued. It is the contention of the petitioners that while the respondent authorities having made structural changes and man power engagement, decided to go for man power engagement under Samagra Shiksha through open advertisement and conduct of examination/interview vide Notification dated 26-07-2019. This contention of the petitioners has however been clarified by the respondents by stating that the man power engagement sought to be made through open advertisement is in respect of technical posts such as the post of Accountant, Auditor, Assistant Auditor, Programmer, Assistant Programmer and support staff such as, Office Assistant. The engagement are only on contractual basis and initially it was meant for only the existing contract employees but later, it was made open for all vide Notification dated 26- 07-2018 The petitioners are on the other hand, high school teachers and therefore, it is apparent that they cannot be having any grievance for their non-engagement on contract basis against the posts aforementioned. 13. However the fact is that it is not only technical posts which are required under the Samagra Shiksha but also deployment of school teachers. 13. However the fact is that it is not only technical posts which are required under the Samagra Shiksha but also deployment of school teachers. Despite the impugned order dated 20-08-2019, the respondent No. 1 by an order issued on the same day, re-deployed as many as 133 officers and teachers under the establishment of the Director of School Education on attachment basis under the Samagra Shiksha. It is the stand of the respondent authorities that a requisition was made by the State Mission Director, Samagra Shiksha to the Principal Director of School Education requisitioning 138 officers and school teachers for placement at different level of posts under Samagra Shiksha. Out of the 138 officers and school teachers requisitioned, 5 (five) of them declined while the remaining 133 officers and teachers agreed to work under the Samagra Shiksha. Consequently, NOC was issued by the Director of School Education. It is the further case of the respondent authorities that the requisition of officers and teaches under the School Education Department was made by the State Mission Director, Samagra Shiksha on the basis of performance of the individual concerned and that is how the petitioners came to be left out. It is true that the substantive appointment of the petitioners is with the School Education Department of the State and therefore, they cannot be said to have an indefeasible right to continue under Samagra Shiksha. However, taking note of the fact that some sort of assessment appears to have been made by the authority concerned under the Samagra Shiksha and the reason for their non-inclusion in the list of officers and teaches not having been make known to the petitioners, I am of the considered view that the claim of the petitioners to be allowed to work under Samagra Shiksha should once again be reconsidered by the State Mission Director, Nagaland Education Mission Society, Samagra Shiksha (respondent No.3) in coordination with the Principal Director of School Education Department by taking into account their experience and length of service rendered. Such reconsideration should be carried out within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 14. The result of such reconsideration should be communicated to the petitioners. Till such time the reconsideration as directed is completed, status quo as directed earlier shall continue. 15. Such reconsideration should be carried out within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 14. The result of such reconsideration should be communicated to the petitioners. Till such time the reconsideration as directed is completed, status quo as directed earlier shall continue. 15. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.